Diogenes the Cynic

Posting links without any commentary is considered bad form for debate around here. Most of us do not have the time or inclination to refute entire web pages line by line. It would be far more helpful if you would select out a few of what you belive are the strongest arguments for your case and summarize them here. You can still provide the relevant links, but we would appreciate it if you made it more clear exactly what you were trying to argue.

Ronin

Yes, mythology.

Pervy and Diogenes the Cynic have addressed this issue well.

Are you saying the Parvati didn't create a boy out of the dirt of her body who would later become the revered Lord Ganesh?

Many myths use real places and known natural events to attach further significance to them. They are still myth.

A supernatural invisible deity fathering himself through part of him that is a Ghost via a human female so that he could kill himself in order to appease his own anger at his own creation is as much a myth as creating a boy from dirt and attaching an elephant's head to him.

As others have pointed out, there are many flood myths attributed to many cultures (not surprisingly, it is their respective heroes who save the day). The Noah story isn't even the first of such myths and seems to be quite similar to the story of Utnapishtim.

As for myself, I find it exremely unbelievable that a single family built a boat large enough to hold a pair of every animal (including penguins and kangaroos) for the time frame allotted.

Perhaps someone can try to build one today and collect a pair of each and every animal to see if such a thing would be feasible.

False dichotomy, TA, can you make the same strong claim of the Vedas or of the ancient claims of the Aztecs, etc, etc.?

Christianity contains all the elements of supernaturalism and mythic archetypes.

Nothing in it is any different than that of other cultures and their claims to knowledge of human origin or of the general mysteries of life, the universe and everything.

Well, last year the great wind god Ehecatl brought his vast power and destruction to the gulf coast shores (though the heretics of this day simply called Him Hurricane Ivan).

Can you refute this proof that Ehecatl exists?

True American

AHHHHHH...

OK! I see where we're going now.

Let me explain. Jimmy Higgins can testify to this...
I am a Conservative (Obviously) and I've heard much about this site, so I wanted to check it out.

Meanwhile, I'm not coming here to troll or disrupt or disagree.
I like to see where the other half are in their thinking so I can understand the world around me. This is actually a good thing. Because we're all completely different when we get into political and religious issues. Isn't it wiser to understand the world than to attempt to change it to our own liking?

You obviously all have no belief in any higher power. I knew that when I logged on. I have been very civil. I will remain so. I have no interest in trying to prove you are all nuts and I have no interest in trying to change the way you think.

I have been having some fun actually reading your different posts and I'm even having fun participating in your song title game and so on.

So, when asked to find proof of the existence of Moses, Jesus and Noah's Ark, I look them up. I find just as much documentation on the existence of them as I do the NON-existence of them. I really couldn't care less about them. However, My daughter was smoking weed at a party and she's only 14. I didn't actually SEE this, so I guess I could simply exclaim it just isn't so, or I can take the word of the 25 eye witnesses who saw her doing it.

I'm not here to argue your beliefs. In fact, I myself am not that heavy into religion. I believe Jesus existed and the rest is hearsay. But, that's just me.

I'm never going to change your minds and on many issues you will not change mine. We'll simply have to agree to disagree. However, I'm following the rules and I am having fun here and I have no intention of causing a disruption. There may actually be times when I post something outside the realm of Religion or Politics which you may find to your interest.
For instance: The piece on the MacLen Catalog. This is going to be an amazing thing to watch as it unfolds...
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...22#post2483622

So, all that being said,

I am simply here to have a good time.

True American

HAHAHAHAHAAA

I'm thinking there were stepping stones in that water.

Again, I said, I believe he existed...
I don't go much beyond that.

Sven

You can find evidence for anything on the web. For Big Foot. For Nessie. For UFOs. In favor of psychics. You name it.
Because of this, it should be obvious that simply bringing up some links proofs nothing at all. You were asked for scientific evidence - do you even know what this means?

I don't care if you do or not - but when you make extraordinary claims, at least have the courtesy to show your sources.

This is in stark contrast to your OP:
Are you saying that Moses didn't free his people from Egypt? This is quite well documented. Hearsay = well documented?
Maybe you think the story of Noah is crazy too. Yet "SCIENTISTS," which you have all put 100% of your beliefs in, have found Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat. Hearsay = scientists have found it?
Many stories in the Bible are in fact true. Hearsay = in fact true?

Oh, and does "I believe Jesus existed and the rest is hearsay." mean that it's hearsay that he was god / the son of god?

Sven

See above - I already deleted it. But too late...

Diogenes the Cynic

This isn't true. You provided no documentation at all. You provided Christian apologist websites with bogus arguments and evidence.

If you don't want to debate about these issues, that's fine, but you should at least know that it's not a google hit contest. Not all citations are equal and your own links do not reflect the evidence, theories or conclusions of genuine historians and scientists. You can just as easily find websites arguing for the existence of Bigfoot, flying saucers, the historicity of Krishna and poltergeists as you can for the Noah's Ark, and I assure you, the latter has no more scientific validity and is taken no more seriously by scientists than any of the former.

True American

Well, I said I was going to remain civil and I will. Apparently, this is only going to go one way I guess.

When I was around 18 or so, I saw a movie in the theatre where actual scientists went to the Mount Ararat region to find this ark. I believe it was called "In Search of Noah's Ark." They found the thing. They filmed it. I actually saw it. Whether or not it was actually Noah's Ark I can't possibly say. But there was a sea going vessel that was lodged there around the time they say Noah sailed his ark. So, it's scientifically documented that a sea going vessel which pretty much matches the description of Noah's Ark was found 15,000 feet above sea level.

The Mayflower was never seen again either after it returned to England. Am I to now believe that the Pilgrims didn't exist either?

Nag all you want about me finding links. I haven't seen any proof that these things weren't real from you.

However, I don't believe that all these things are myths. Apparently you do.

Hell, I've written two fiction stories myself. I wouldn't expect anyone to believe they are otherwise. The Bible is supposed to be true stories. It can't ALL be fiction, can it? Naturally, over all these years, the stories are going to grow into something collossal. If I tell you the sky is blue and you pass it down through your family for 2000 years, I'm sure the last teller of the tale will say the sky was opaq with seagulls attacking eagles and flying elephants were stomping on the gulls that looked like giant mice.

I've never actually seen the Titanic either, but I saw a movie called "In Search of Titanic" which showed pictures of it on the ocean floor. Just like the Noah's Ark movie did. Am I to now believe that the Titanic is a myth as well?

Julian

You are missing the point. The Titanic is not an outrageous claim and therefore does not require outrageous evidence. Besides, it is well-attested to.

We are not arguing beliefs. You have, depite your denial, been presented with scientific evidence that obviates the need for belief. You can certainly stick your head in the sand, that is your right but I wonder why you would look straight into the face of facts and deny them or reduce them to a status of belief.

People have been civil to you here, I don't know why you think we haven't?

Julian

Sven

Sorry, but I can not resist: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:
This movie was fiction. If you had done any research you would now this. Go here and read: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a001.html

Two snippets:

Further expeditions have taken place in the new millennium, but no proof of the Ark has yet been found.
[...]
Due to a popular Hollywood movie released in theaters in 1976 ("In Search of Noah's Ark"), many people remain under the impression that Noah's Ark has definitely been found.Particularly memorable to many people was a fuzzy telephoto photograph of what some thought might be the Ark. Later expeditions proved that the object was simply a large rock formation.

Nevermind that there exists extensice documentation of this event. Nevermind that no global flood happend at the same time as the Mayflower.

Ever heard about "burden of proof"? What would you say if a Muslim answered: "I haven't seen any proof that these things weren't real from you." after you questioned the reality of the story that Mohammed split the moon in two halves?

Since all the evidence points to this conclusion, this is the only rational conclusion. *shrug*

Yeah, "supposed".

No, and nobody claims so. Of course the bible also got some things correct.

Right. So why you still believe that the story about Noah's flood is true is beyond me.

See above for the Mayflower. This strawman does not get better the second time you use it.